DIVERGENCE AND CONVERGENCE IN GENUINE AND PSEUDO MODES

 

To contrast the noumenal objectivity, and therefore absolute divergence, of metachemistry with the noumenal pseudo-subjectivity, and therefore absolute pseudo-convergence, of pseudo-metaphysics, as one would contrast spatial space with sequential time (pseudo-time), or elemental particles with elemental pseudo-wavicles.

 

To contrast the noumenal subjectivity, and therefore absolute convergence, of metaphysics with the noumenal pseudo-objectivity, and therefore absolute pseudo-divergence, of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast repetitive time with spaced space (pseudo-space), or elemental wavicles with elemental pseudo-particles.

 

To contrast the phenomenal objectivity, and therefore relative divergence, of chemistry with the phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity, and therefore relative pseudo-convergence, of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast volumetric volume with massed mass (pseudo-mass), or molecular particles with molecular pseudo-wavicles.

 

To contrast the phenomenal subjectivity, and therefore relative convergence, of physics with the phenomenal pseudo-objectivity, and therefore relative pseudo-divergence, of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast massive mass with voluminous volume (pseudo-volume), or molecular wavicles with molecular pseudo-particles.

 

Objectivity diverges in straight lines, whether absolutely or relatively, from free squares or rectangles, whereas pseudo-subjectivity pseudo-converges in curved lines, whether absolutely or relatively, from bound circles or ellipses (ovals), all of which, conditioned by a hegemonic vacuum, are ringful, or ring-like, in character.

 

Subjectivity converges in curved lines, whether absolutely or relatively, from free circles or ellipses, whereas pseudo-objectivity pseudo-diverges in straight lines, whether absolutely or relatively, from bound squares or rectangles, all of which, conditioned by a hegemonic plenum, are badgeful, or badge-like, in character.

 

That said, the free elements are no more completely free than the bound ones (pseudo-elements) completely bound, not even in relation to absolute (noumenal) divergence or converge, pseudo-convergence or pseudo-divergence.

 

The objective free elements are either absolutely predominant (3:1 ratio of free soma to bound psyche in metachemistry) or relatively predominant (2:1 ratio of free soma to bound psyche in chemistry), whereas the subjective free elements are either absolutely preponderant (3:1 ratio of free psyche to bound soma in metaphysics) or relatively preponderant (2:1 ratio of free psyche to bound soma in physics).

 

Correlatively, the pseudo-subjective bound pseudo-elements are either absolutely pseudo-preponderant (3:1 ratio of bound psyche to free soma in pseudo-metaphysics) or relatively pseudo-preponderant (2:1 ratio of bound psyche to free soma in pseudo-physics), whereas the pseudo-objective bound pseudo-elements are either absolutely pseudo-predominant (3:1 ratio of bound soma to free psyche in pseudo-metachemistry) or relatively pseudo-predominant (2:1 ratio of bound soma to free psyche in pseudo-chemistry).

 

Thus the gender dichotomy between female objectivity and male subjectivity, pseudo-female pseudo-objectivity and pseudo-male pseudo-subjectivity, is never total, since all elements and pseudo-elements are combinations, to greater or lesser extends, of male and female aspects.

 

Nevertheless, it can be logically demonstrated that objectivity is broadly female (in noumenal or phenomenal ratio terms) and pseudo-objectivity broadly pseudo-female (in noumenal or phenomenal ratio terms), whereas subjectivity is broadly male (in noumenal or phenomenal ratio terms) and pseudo-subjectivity broadly pseudo-male (in noumenal or phenomenal ratio terms).

 

Hence the absolutely predominant female character, with(out) noumenal objectivity, of metachemistry as against the relatively predominant female character, with(out) phenomenal objectivity, of chemistry, both of which would correlatively contrast with the absolutely pseudo-preponderant pseudo-male character, with(in) noumenal pseudo-subjectivity, of pseudo-metaphysics and the relatively pseudo-preponderant pseudo-male character, with(in) phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity, of pseudo-physics.

 

Hence the absolutely preponderant male character, with(in) noumenal subjectivity, of metaphysics as against the relatively preponderant male character, with(in) phenomenal subjectivity, of physics, both of which would correlatively contrast with the absolutely pseudo-predominant pseudo-female character, with(out) noumenal pseudo-objectivity, of pseudo-metachemistry and the relatively pseudo-predominant pseudo-female character, with(out) phenomenal pseudo-objectivity, of pseudo-chemistry.